61

Chapter-III:

Indian Ethos: An Understanding

What is India? What are the ethoses of Indian people? Why do Indian

people shout “Bharat Mata Ki Jay?” Why India is considered to be the

mother? Jawaharlal Nehru, the first Prime Minister of India, who made a

very lucid attempt to understand India in his famous discourse The

Discovery of India, wrote a beautiful narrative that “Sometimes as I

reached a gathering, a great roar of welcome would greet me: “Bharat

Mata Ki Jay”- ‘Victory to Mother India.’ I would ask them unexpectedly

what they meant by that cry, who was this Bharat Mata, Mother India,

whose victory they wanted? My question would amuse them and surprise

them, and then, not knowing exactly what to answer, they would look at

each other and at me.” (Nehru, Jawaharlal. The Discovery of India. New

Delhi: Jawaharlal Nehru Memorial Fund & Oxford University Press,

1948, p. 60)

Or one can quote Romaine Rolland, as quoted by Jawaharlal Nehru as

saying that “If there is one place on the face of the earth where all the

dreams of living men have found a home from the very earliest days

when man began the dream of existence, it is India.” (Nehru, Jawaharlal.

The Discovery of India. New Delhi: Jawaharlal Nehru Memorial Fund &

Oxford University Press, 1948, p. 89)

Perhaps the most suitable and appropriate way to be introduced to this

Chapter is through the words of Jawaharlal Nehru. He narrates that

62

“During these years of thought and activity my mind has been full of

India, trying to understand her…what was this India that possessed me

and beckoned to me continually…It seemed monstrous to me that a great

country like India, with a rich and immemorial past, should be bound

hand and foot to a far away island which imposed its will upon her. It

was still monstrous that this forcible union had resulted in poverty and

degradation beyond measure. What is this India, apart from her physical

and geographical aspects? What did she represent in the past? What gave

strength to her then? How did she lose that old strength? And has she lost

completely? Does she represent anything vital now, apart from being the

home of a vast number of human beings? How does she fit into the

modern world? Did I know India? – I who presumed to scrap much of her

past heritage? There was a great deal that had to be scrapped, that must

be scrapped; but surely India could not have been what she undoubtedly

was, and could not have continued a cultured existence for thousand of

years, if she had not possessed something very vital and enduring,

something that was worthwhile. What was this something?” (Nehru,

Jawaharlal. The Discovery of India. New Delhi: Jawaharlal Nehru

Memorial Fund & Oxford University Press, 1948, p. 49)

The religious life of India is something like the river Ganges, which

flows out of the Himalayas and is enlarged by the tributaries as it moves

east toward the Bay of Bengal. Because the water of the Ganges is

regular and dependable it has allowed civilization to flourish across much

of northern India. It has also given Indian culture a sense of security

protection, and even care which has led to the popular name for the river,

Ganga Ma (“Mother Ganges”). The Indian life has flowed along for

63

thousand years, swirling from its own power but also from the powers of

the new streams that have added to its force. Many influences-early

indigenous religion and influences from later migrants- have added to

India’s way of life, we can easily call it Hinduism, since it’s not a

religion but a civilization, Hinduism’s inherent momentum. It has no one

identifiable founder, no strong organizational structure to defend it and

spread its influence nor any creed to define and stabilize its beliefs; and

in a way it seems to defy reason Hinduism unites the worship of many

gods with a belief in a single divine reality. In the words of Michael

Molly “Hinduism is more like a family of related beliefs and the name

Hinduism, if used to suggest a unified religion, can be misleading. But

the limitations of Hinduism may also be its strengths. It is like palace that

began as a two-room cottage. Over the centuries, wings have been built

on it, and now it has countless rooms, stairs, corridors, statues, fountains,

and gardens. There is something here to please and astonish-and dismay-

almost everyone.” (Molly, Michael. Experiencing the World’s Religions:

Tradition, Challenge, and Change. California: Mayfield Publishing

Company, 1999, p. 58)

Professor Carl Clemen defines Hinduism as “extremely comprehensive.

It has not only a religious, but also a social meaning, for the caste system

is a very important constituent of it. As the name of a religion, it excludes

those religious societies which do not recognize the Veda as

authoritative-Buddhism, Jainism etc.- but includes practically all other

shades of Indian religion from the first centuries B.C. down to the present

day.” (Clemen, Carl. Religions of the World. New Delhi: Cosmo

Publications, 2005, p. 108)

64

In the words of Charles Gorham, Hinduism is “a faith which does not

gather round the person of a real being, whether human or believed to be

divine. It is based on a collection of ancient Sanskrit writings, the

Vedas.” (Gorham, Charles. Ethics of the Great Religions of the World.

Delhi: Aparna Publications, 1904, p. 29)

Mark Juergensmeyer also equates ‘Hinduism’ as “the name for India’s

traditional culture and a title of a specific religious community. In

traditional India there is no clear distinction between religion and general

culture of religion: even the words Hindu and India are etymologically

linked. Both were coined by outsiders to refer to the land and the people

along the Indus River.” (Juergensmeyer, Mark. Religious Nationalism

Confronts the Secular State. Delhi: Oxford University Press, 1993, p. 81)

To understand the Indian ethos, it is primary to understand the Hindu

psyche, for the simple reason that both of them are, more or less, one and

the same, to that an extant that, they can be used interchangeably. By

Hindus what is meant is all those people who accept, or did accept, that

social polity and religious discipline which is based on the teachings of

the Vedas. Jagadisha Chandra Chatterji, in his book titled as Hindu

Realism gives the idea of the Hindu philosophy by contrasting it with the

western philosophy. He believes that “It seems to a Hindu that the

Western students of his philosophy start generally with the following pre-

suppositions, which are apparently assumed as established facts:

1. Man can never know metaphysical truths by direct experience, in

the same way, for instance, as he can know sense objects.

65

2. Even it is conceded, as a sort of possibility, that men may perhaps

know these truths some day by direct experience, yet there has

been so far no man who has known them in this fashion.

3. Therefore, being matters of pure speculation…

As against this, the Hindu pre-conceptions are:

1. Man can know metaphysical truths like any other truths, by direct

experience, and not merely by speculation…

2. There have been men in the past who have thus known the whole

truth of our nature and existence, as well as that of the universe as

a whole.

3. And, it is by knowing metaphysical truths by direct experience that

some of the Rishis have taught to the Hindus.

4. But the Rishis have taught the Metaphysical truths not as dogmas,

to be received on faith, but by rational demonstration.”(Chatterjee,

Jagadisha Chandra. Hindu Realism. Delhi, Swastika Publications,

1975, p. 6-7)

So to understand India and Indian Ethos it is imperative that one should

be aware of the components that make what India is. And the journey

goes back to the era of the Vedas, Puranas and Upanishads to understand

what Indian Ethos is. India sans religion is almost nothing. To understand

India it is necessary to understand Indian religion life and its influences

on life. One may have a question: why does religion exist? Or what is the

need of understanding a religion to understand the people who practice

it? Michael Molly attempted similar questions when he states that

“Because we and our loved ones must die, we have to face the pain of

66

death and the inevitable questions it brings about whether there is any

soul, afterlife, or rebirth. People often look to religion for the answers.

Religion can help us to cope up with death, and religious rituals can offer

comfort…Human beings are also social by nature and religion offers

companionship and the fulfillment that can come from belonging to a

group…Human beings have a need to seek out and create artistic forms

of expression. Religion stimulates art, music, and dance, and has been the

inspirational source of some of the most imaginative buildings in the

world. Religion not only makes use of multiple arts but also integrates

them into a living, often beautiful whole.” (Molloy, Michael.

Experiencing the World’s Religions: Tradition, Challenge, and Change.

California: Mayfield Publishing Company, 1999. p. 3)

The Indian psyche can never be free from the influences that these great

works are having. Any Indian may be living in rural or urban India may

be rich or poor, may be intelligent or humble in skills, may be literate or

illiterate, India and Indian Ethos run through the veins of Indian silently.

These great works of literature of ancient Indians are necessary to

understand Indian ness. The point emphasized here is the importance of

the Epics and Puranas in the history of Indian thought.

The Vedas, the Upanishads, the Puranas, the Bhagvad Gita, the

Mahabharata and the Ramayana may be regarded as the source and

fountain to which the later developments of Indian thought can be traced.

The Rig Veda, the most important of the Vedas, has an account of the

origin of the universe. The universe is said to have emerged from a

division and cosmic sacrifice of a primeval super person, Purusha. But

the account includes a touching admission of uncertainty. The four Vedas

67

end with even later works, called the Upanishads, which express the

religious and philosophical ideas that arose in introspective and

meditative traditions.

The Vedas were the outpourings of the Aryans as they streamed into the

rich land of India. They brought their ideas with them. The Vedic hymns

are people’s collective reaction to the wonder and awe of existence. So

there is no need to attach tag ‘Hindu’ to the Vedas. Jawaharlal Nehru

rightly points out that “Many Hindus look upon the Vedas as revealed

scriptures. This seems to me to be peculiarly unfortunate, for thus we

miss their real significance- the unfolding of the human mind in the

earliest stages of thought. And what a wonderful mind that was! The

Vedas were simply meant to be a collection of the existing knowledge of

the day; they are a jumble of many things: hymns, prayers, ritual or

sacrifice, magic, magnificent nature poetry. There is no idolatry in them;

no temples for the gods. The vitality and affirmation of life pervading

them are extraordinary. The early Vedic hymns were so full of zest for

life that they paid little attention to the soul. In a vague way they believed

in some kind of existence after death.” (Nehru, Jawaharlal. The

Discovery of India. New Delhi: Jawaharlal Nehru Memorial Fund &

Oxford University Press, 1948, p. 79)

According to Michael Molloy, the most important concepts of

Upanishads are “Brahman, Atman, maya, karma, and moksha. These

primary concepts, which would become important notions in much later

Hindu spirituality, continue to be taught today…The Upanishads insist

that Brahman is something that can be known-not simply believed

in…What is it to know Brahman? The Upanishads insist that it cannot be

68

put fully into words, but they give hints. Brahman is a lived experience

that all things are in some way holy because they come from the same

sacred source…Although Atman is sometimes used interchangeably with

the term self or soul, the notion of Atman in the Upanishads is larger than

the notion of an individual soul or self. In Hindu belief, each person has

an individual soul, but the Upanishads teach that all human beings share

the same Atman…The Upanishads speak of the everyday world as maya,

which is usually translated as “illusion.”…What determines the direction

of one’s rebirth is Karma. It implies the notion of moral consequencesthat

is carried along with every act. Karma is the moral law of cause and

effect, and belief in Karma is a belief that every action has an automatic

moral consequence…In the Upanishads; moksha is the ultimate human

goal. It has various connotations. Moksha certainly includes the notion of

getting beyond egoistic responses, such as resentment and anger, which

limit the individual…moksha implies liberation even from limitations of

being an individual.”(Molloy, Michael. Experiencing the World’s

Religions: Tradition, Challenge, and Change. California: Mayfield

Publishing Company, 1999. p. 64-67)

These lofty ideas of the Upanishads have influenced the lives of the

people of India in every walk of life. The Upanishads are instinct with a

spirit of inquiry, of mental adventure, of passion for finding out the truth

about the things. The search for this truth is, of course not by the

objective methods of modern science, yet there is an element of scientific

method in the approach. No dogma is allowed to come in the way. The

emphasis is essentially on self-realization, on knowledge of the

individual self and the absolute self, both of which are said to be the

69

same in essence. The objective external world is not considered unreal

but real in a relative sense, an aspect of the inner reality.

Another remarkable influence on Indian perspectives is that of the

Bhagvad Gita. Among other important notions expressed in the Gita, and

which influence Indian life greatly, is its way of defining Karma.

Contrary to the teaching of nonviolence that was at the time of

Mahabharat’s creation growing strong in India in traditions like

Buddhism and Jainism, Lord Krishna advises Arjuna to fight to protect

his throne and the structure of society-to fight is his duty. According to

Michael Molloy, “At a moment of great revelation, Krishna shows

Arjuna that a divine reality is at work within everything in the universe-

in living and also in dying. Krishna even says that for the warrior, there is

nothing nobler than a righteous war. The recommendations that Arjuna

should fight has posed a moral problems for some of the followers of

Hinduism. Gandhi is typical of those who have solved this

problem…Gandhi held that the call to arms is not about the real war but a

call to fight against dangerous moral and psychological forces, such as

ignorance, selfishness and anger. This interpretation, though it seems to

go against the literal intent of the text, has been influential.”(Molloy,

Michael. Experiencing the World’s Religions: Tradition, Challenge, and

Change. California: Mayfield Publishing Company, 1999. p. 70)

The beauty and the most impressive aspect of Indian way of life in the

ancient time is that there was very less difference between the class and

the mass in terms of attitudes towards life. The loftiness of the thoughts

presented in the Vedas and the Upanishads were not only confined to

chosen ones, they were a part and parcel of the entire community. Carl

70

Clemen points out that “no one who is familiar with the phenomena of

religion can imagine for a moment that these speculations (of Hindu way

of life) represent the average level of the ordinary Indian…Hinduism has

managed to survive in its native India down to the present day.”(Clemen,

Carl. Religions of the World. New Delhi: Cosmo Publications, 2005. p.

105)

As perceived by many, India is made of such stuff that it can produce

excellent individuals, but can not become an excellent society. The

ideology of the Vedas and the Upanishads put emphasis on the

development and enlightenment of the individual. This is , may be, due to

the qualities of Indo-Aryans. But it seems that the intense individualism

of the Indo-Aryans led, in the long run, to both the good and the evil that

their culture produced. It led to the production of the very superior types,

not in one particular period of history, but again and again, age after age.

Jawaharlal Nehru points out the negative impacts of such a psyche by

saying that “very individualism led them to attach little importance to the

social aspect of man, of man’s duty to society. For each person life was

divided and fixed up, a bundle of duties and responsibilities within this

narrow sphere in the graded hierarchy. He had no duty to, or conception

of, society as a whole, and no attempt was made to make him feel his

solidarity within it. This idea is perhaps largely a modern development

and can not be found in the ancient society. It is unreasonable, therefore,

to expect it in ancient India. Still, the emphasis on individualism, on

excessiveness, on graded castes is much more evident in India. In later

ages it was to grow into a very prison for the mind of the people-not only

for the lower castes, who suffered most from it, but for the higher ones

71

too.” (Nehru, Jawaharlal. The Discovery of India. New Delhi: Jawaharlal

Nehru Memorial Fund & Oxford University Press, 1948.p. 95)

So much emphasis is laid on ‘impersonal God’ in the Indian way of

looking that ‘personal gods’ are taken as a kind of stepping stones

towards the ‘impersonal God’. The Indian philosophical and spiritual

quests have been influenced by this mode of acceptance. The theory of

karma is result of such views, which has greatly influenced Indian

psyche. Carl Clemen opines in this regard that “There were many divine

beings, but the place of living personalities to whom a personal relation

was possible was taken by the mechanical service of sacrifice…The rise

of the theory of Karma drove the idea of personal deity still farther in to

the background. If a man’s moral deeds automatically determine the fate

of his soul in the next life, if his external and the internal fate is thus self

determined, there is no room for that cry for help addressed by weak man

to superior powers which give such a strong support to the faith in a

deity. And the worship of a God was further weakened by the vision of

the Brahma as taught in the oldest Upanishads. To be Impersonal

Absolute, of which a man is himself a part, there can be no such relation

as that implied in personal worship.”(Clemen, Carl. Religions of the

World. New Delhi: Cosmo Publications, 2005. p. 106)

There are people who are of the opinion that India does not have a sense

of history. Another charge against India is that India has never been a

‘nation’. These two charges are interrelated in the sense that both are

having wider effects on each other. India does not have a sense of history

simply for the fact that Indian psyche is more individualistic than

collective one. In sharp contrast to the Western mindset where the

72

emphasis is on the society and outer development, in Indian thought

tradition the emphasis is on the individual emancipation. That’s why

India can produce remarkable individuals; it can never have a remarkable

society. So there is less care to be a part of a history. Regarding the

second charge of not being a ‘nation’, it can be attributed to the fact that

the whole concept of ‘nation’ is a Western one. Traditionally, India is a

place where every one, including animals and in-animate objects, can live

in harmony. The concept of ‘nation’ is a limited and a product of war

mentality. Jawaharlal Nehru rightly points out that “Recent events all

over the world have demonstrated that the notion that nationalism is

fading away before the impact of internationalism and proletarian

movements has little truth. It is still one of the most powerful urges that

move a people, and round it cluster sentiments and traditions and a sense

of common living and common purpose. While the intellectual strata of

the middle classes were gradually moving away from nationalism, or so

they thought, labor and proletarian movements, deliberately based on the

internationalism, were drifting towards nationalism. The coming of war

swept everybody everywhere into the net of nationalism…If nationalism

is still so universal in its influence, even in countries powerfully affected

by new ideas and international forces, how much more must it dominate

the mind of India…Nevertheless, India, for all its intense nationalistic

fervor, has gone further than many nations in her acceptance of real

internationalism and co-ordination, and even to some extent the

subordination, of the independent nation state to a world organization.”

(Nehru, Jawaharlal. The Discovery of India. New Delhi: Jawaharlal

Nehru Memorial Fund & Oxford University Press, 1948 p. 52)

73

But due to being under the rule of Mughals and the Britishers for a long

period of time, India has developed a sense of nation. And with this shift

there is a shift in Indian perspective to the world. There appears a lack of

continuity in Indian thought pattern due the invasion. But there has not

been such a break and there is a definite continuity. Also from time to

time, vivid periods of renascence have occurred, and some of them have

been long and brilliant. Always there is visible an attempt to understand

and adapt the new and harmonize it with the old, or at any rate with parts

of the old which were considered worth preserving. Jawaharlal Nehru

points out towards this tendency of Indian mind by saying that “Often

that old retains an external form only, as a kind of symbol, and change its

inner content. But something vital and living continues, some urge

driving the people in a direction not wholly realized, and always a desire

for synthesis between the old and the new. It was this urge and desire that

kept them going and enabled them to absorb new ideas while retaining

much of the old. Whether there was such a thing as an Indian dream

through the ages, vivid and full of life or sometimes reduced to the

murmurings of troubled sleep…Every people and every nation has some

such belief or myth of national destiny and perhaps it is partly true in

each case.” (Nehru, Jawaharlal. The Discovery of India. New Delhi:

Jawaharlal Nehru Memorial Fund & Oxford University Press, 1948 p.

55)

It has been a long debate either Indian way of life is the acceptance or the

negation of life. The precise phrase used by the Western mentality is that

India is other-worldly place and Indians are other-worldly people. Many

Western writers have encouraged the notion that Indians are other-

worldly. Jawaharlal Nehru gives a nice answer to this notion by noting

74

that “the poor and unfortunate in every country become to some extent

other-worldly, unless they become revolutionaries, for this world is

evidently not meant for them.” (Nehru, Jawaharlal. The Discovery of

India. New Delhi: Jawaharlal Nehru Memorial Fund & Oxford

University Press, 1948 p. 81)

In India we find during every period when her civilization bloomed an

intense joy in life and nature, a pleasure in the act of living, the

development of art and music and literature and song and dancing and

painting and the theatre, and even a highly sophisticated inquiry in the

sex relations. It is inconceivable that a culture or view of life based on

other-worldliness or world-worthlessness could have produced all these

manifestations of vigorous and varied life. Indeed it should be obvious

that any culture that was basically other-worldly could not have carried

on for thousand of years. Perhaps both principles are present in varying

degrees in all the old religions and cultures. Jawaharlal Nehru also

confirms that “Indian culture taken as a whole never emphasized the

negation of life, though some of its philosophies did so; it seems to have

done so much less than Christianity. Buddhism and Jainism rather

emphasized the abstention from life, and in certain periods of Indian

history there was running away from life on a big scale, as for instance,

when large numbers of people joined the Buddhist monasteries….But

Buddhism, in spite of theoretical approach, or rather approaches, for

there are several, as a matter of fact avoids extremes; it is the doctrine of

the golden mean, the middle path. Even the idea of Nirvana was very far

from being the nothingness, as it is supposed to be sometimes; it was a

positive condition, but because beyond the range of human thought

negative terms were used to describe it. If Buddhism, a typical product of

75

Indian thought and culture, had merely a doctrine of life negation or

denial, it would surely have had some such effect on the hundreds of

millions who profess it. Yet, as a matter of fact, the Buddhist countries

are full of evidence to the contrary, and the Chinese people are an

outstanding example of what life affirmation could be.” (Nehru,

Jawaharlal. The Discovery of India. New Delhi: Jawaharlal Nehru

Memorial Fund & Oxford University Press, 1948 p. 83)

There are legitimate reasons for this confusion between life affirmation

and life confirmation. The confusion seems to have arisen from the fact

that Indian thought was originally and always laying stress on the

ultimate purpose of life. It could never forget the transcendent element in

its make up; and so; while affirming life to the full, it refused to become a

victim and slave of life. Jawaharlal Nehru elaborates that “Indulge in

right action with all your strength and energy, it said, but keep above it,

and do not worry much about the results of such actions. Thus it taught

detachment in life and action, not abstention from them. The idea of

detachment runs through Indian thought and philosophy, as sit does

through most other philosophies. It is another way of saying that a right

balances should be kept between the visible and invisible worlds, the

other world is forgotten and fades away, and action itself becomes

without ultimate purpose. There is an emphasis on truth, a dependence on

it, and a passion for it, in the early adventures of Indian mind. Dogma

and revelation are passed by as something for lesser minds which cannot

rise above them. The approach was one of experiment based on personal

experience. That experience, when it dealt with the invisible world, was,

like all emotional and psychic experiences, different from the experiences

of the visible, external world. It seemed to go out of the three-

76

dimensional world we know into some different and vaster realm, and

was thus difficult to describe in terms of three dimensions. What that was

experience was, and whether it was a vision or realization of some

aspects of truth and reality, or was a merely a phantasm of the

imagination, I do not know. Probably it was often self-delusion. What

interests more is the approach, which was not authoritarian or dogmatic

but was an attempt to discover for oneself what lay behind the external

aspect of life.” (Nehru, Jawaharlal. The Discovery of India. New Delhi:

Jawaharlal Nehru Memorial Fund & Oxford University Press, 1948 p.

85)

Another remarkable influence on Indian life is that of Buddhism. The

Buddha’s way was a path of moderation, a middle path, not only for

himself but also for his disciples. It was midway between the worldly life

of the householder that he had lived before leaving home and the ascetic

life of social withdrawal that had followed after his departure from home.

Michael Molloy regards “Buddha’s teachings are like the Buddha

himself-practical…the Buddha concentrated on what is useful. HE

refused to talk about anything else…The \Buddha wished to concentrate

on the two most important questions about existence: How can we

minimize suffering, both our own and that of others? And how can we

attain inner peace?” (Molloy, Michael. Experiencing the World’s

Religions: Tradition, Challenge, and Change. California: Mayfield

Publishing Company, 1999. p.108)

Two great movements grew out of the opposition of the Aryan traditions

in India, and which have put impact on Indian life are Buddhism and

Jainism. Jainism has not spread widely and had a less impact on Indian

77

life because it is uncompromising: in it we find extremist quality that is

fascinating, thought provoking, and often noble. Tendencies toward

nonviolence and austerity apparent in Hinduism and Buddhism are

carried to their logical conclusion. Although Jainism has not spread

widely, its strong ideal of non-violence has attracted interest throughout

the world. Michael Molloy describes Jainism as a religion that “sees

human being as composed of two opposing parts. The material side of

human being seeks pleasure, escape from pain, and self-interest while the

spiritual side seeks freedom and escape from all bondage to the material

world and from the limitations of the ego.” (Molloy, Michael.

Experiencing the World’s Religions: Tradition, Challenge, and Change.

California: Mayfield Publishing Company, 1999. p.167)

The best synthesis, that is essential quality of India, can be seen in

Sikhism. Sikhism grew in Punjab. Although the region has a long history

of religious conflict between Hindus and Muslims, it is also an area in

which significant attempts have been made to bridge division and

misunderstanding. Therefore, it is not surprising, that Sikhism exhibits

element reminiscent of both groups.

Indian way of life and Indian patterns of philosophy are not different

entities. They were thought to be one and inseparable. So the philosophy

was not business of few philosophers and highbrows. Philosophy was an

essential part of the religion of the masses. This is a major difference

between the Indian approach to philosophy and the Western approach. In

India philosophy was part and parcel of religion, it is an approach for a

more beautiful, more harmonious, more intense, deeper, more meaningful

life. While in the West, philosophy is considered to be more a matter of

78

mind, less tied to life and more of a practice of few chosen ones. In India

the philosophy was for some deep and intricate attempt to know the

causes and laws of all phenomena, the search for the ultimate purpose of

life, and the attempt to find an organic unity in life’s many

contradictions. Jawaharlal Nehru is impressed by this quality of Indian

people. He notes that “Something of that great wisdom impressed itself

even upon the illiterate and ignorant masses…our trial has been more

drawn out and poverty and uttermost misery have long been the

inseparable companions of our people. And yet they still laugh and sing

and dance and do not loose hope.” (Nehru, Jawaharlal. The Discovery of

India. New Delhi: Jawaharlal Nehru Memorial Fund & Oxford

University Press, 1948 p. 84)

To understand India and Indian ethos it is very necessary to understand

the Indian caste system. The roots of the Indian caste system trail back to

the era of the coming of the Aryans. The coming of the Aryans into India

rose new problems-racial and political. The conquered race, the

Dravidians, had a long background of civilization behind them, but there

is little doubt that the Aryans considered themselves vastly superior and a

wide gulf separated the two races. Then there were also the backward

aboriginal tribes, nomads or forest dwellers. Out of this conflict and

interaction of races gradually arose the caste system, which, in the course

of succeeding centuries, was to affect Indian life so profoundly. Probably

caste was neither Aryan nor Dravidian. It was an attempt at the social

organization of different races, a rationalization of the facts as they

existed at the time. It brought degradation in Indian social fabric

afterwards, and it is still a curse and burden. But at a time it was

customary for the conquerors to enslave the conquered races; caste

79

enabled more peaceful solution which fitted in with the growing

specialization of functions. Life was graded and out of the mass of

agriculturists evolved Vaishyas, the agriculturists’ artisans, and

merchants; the Kshatriyas, or rulers and warriors; and the Brahmins,

priests and thinkers who were supposed to guide policy and preserve the

ideals of the nation. Below these three were the Shudras or laborers and

unskilled workers. Among the indigenous tribes many were gradually

assimilated and given a place at the bottom of the social scale that is

among the Shudras. The process of assimilation has been a continuous

one. Michael Molloy gives reference of The Bhagvad Gita to understand

the caste system of India. He remarks that the caste system receives

“further religious approval in the Bhagvad Gita, which recognizes that

there are different types of people and that their ways of perfection will

differ, depending on their personality type and the role in society. For

example, active people will perfect themselves through the unselfishness

of their work; and intellectual people will perfect themselves through

teaching and study.” (Molloy, Michael. Experiencing the World’s

Religions: Tradition, Challenge, and Change. California: Mayfield

Publishing Company, 1999. p. 71)

The Indian mind has been extraordinary in putting the life’s activities

into different compartments. Jawaharlal Nehru explains the trait of Indian

society by saying that “The Indian mind was extraordinarily analytical

and had a passion for putting ideas and concepts, and even life’s

activities, into compartments. The Aryans not only divided the society

into four main groups but also divided individual’s life into four parts:

Dharma, the first part consisted of growth and adolescence the student

period of life, the student period of life, acquiring knowledge, developing

80

self discipline and self-control, continence; Arth, the second one of a

householder and man of the world; Kaam, the third one was that of an

elder statesman, who had attained a certain poise and objectivity; Moksh;

this last stage was that of the recluse, who lived life largely cut off from

the world’s activities. In this way also they adjusted the two opposing

tendencies which often exist side by side in man- the acceptance of life in

its fullness and the rejection of it.” (Nehru, Jawaharlal. The Discovery of

India. New Delhi: Jawaharlal Nehru Memorial Fund & Oxford

University Press, 1948 p. 86)

Yogesh Atal, a renowned sociologist, notes the impact of caste system in

modern India by saying that “Concern about caste is amply evident in

modern India. In our quest for modernity we wish to bid good bye to

tradition. Since caste is viewed as a representative of tradition, its

condemnation by the new elite is understandable; by under-scoring past

we have given legitimacy to our desire to derecognize caste. But little do

we realize that wishes are not horses and that legislation is not magic

lamp. Social structures do not disappear, or even change simply in

response to speech-making or wishful thinking. One may desire to see the

departure of a tradition but the tradition may enact seemingly fresh

arrival in some other guys.” (Atal, Yogesh. Understanding Indian

Society. New Delhi: Har-Anand Publications, 1993. p.117)

The foreign influences which have affected the development of Indian

religion have differed greatly in kind and degree. Of the two great

religions which have affected India as a result of political events, Islam

exerted far less influence than did Christianity. Islam has not been

81

successful in changing the Indian psyche in general as the Christianity

has been.

The coming of Islam, along with new ways of living and new world

view, has definitely influenced Indian psyche at the deepest possible

level. Not only that it has influenced the general lives of the people of

India, it has greatly influenced ‘Hinduism’ and its shades have been

colored by the advent of Islam and the Muslim in this hitherto almost

indigenous country and culture. Due to the spread and dominance of

Islam in India, Hindu as a religion as well as a person has been greatly

changed and it is still changing. Hinduism, as a way of life of the people

of this nation, has become, for the first place, a reactionary one, which, it

was never in its history. Professor Carl Clemen notes the same

perspective when he says that “Only a minority of the Mohammedans in

India can be traced back to foreign conquerors that brought their faith

with them. The majority were originally Hindus who, owing to political

events which culminated in the dynasty of the Mohammedan Mogul

emperors, adopted Islam, some by compulsion and some voluntarily. Of

course this great extension of the foreign religion was bound to have

effects on the faith of the Hindus, although, these were confined to

certain periods and certain men or groups of men. Even after the

Mohammedan domination of India had ceased, however, the religious

differences between Hindus and Mohammedans continued to play a large

part in the life of India. The British Government has exploited them to

the utmost.” (Clemen, Carl. Religions of the World. New Delhi: Cosmo

Publications, 2005. p. 94)

82

Jawaharlal Nehru believes that “Partly because the great majority of the

Moslems in India were converts from the Hinduism, partly because of the

long contact, Hindus and Muslims in India developed numerous common

traits, habits, and ways of living and artistic tastes, especially in northern

India- in music, painting, architecture, food, clothes, and common

traditions. They lived peacefully as one people, joined each other’s

festivals and celebrations, spoke the same language, lived in more or less

the same way, and faced identical economical problems.” (Nehru,

Jawaharlal. The Discovery of India. New Delhi: Jawaharlal Nehru

Memorial Fund & Oxford University Press, 1948 p. 268)

Islam introduced the concept of monotheism and human brotherhood in

India after Upanishads, but it itself became victim of Manusmriti after

some time and caste system took roots in it. The Muslim influence can be

seen in all walks of life. But no where it is seen so vividly as in customs,

in intimate details of domestic life, in the fashion of dress, in the ways of

cooking, in the marriage ceremony and in the courtly institutions and the

etiquette of Maratha, Rajput and Sikh Princes.

The fabric of India is woven strongly by various movements. One of the

greatest influences on Indian way of living is by the Bhakti Movement.

The human brotherhood of Islam gave rise to the Bhakti Movement in

South India and later spread in the North. This movement totally rejected

the laws of Manusmriti and gave equal status to all men and women. That

was why it was very popular in the lower strata of the society. The

movement, which shook the entire country for more than two centuries,

contributed much to the national awakening of the people- both the

Hindus and the Muslims.

83

After conquest of India by Britain, modern scientific thought was

introduced to India, which resulted into two movements. One was

influenced by modern scientific thought led by Raja Ram Mohan Roy,

was called Brahma Samaj. It showed the leading path for the secularism

and socialism which India adopted after independence. Other was

reactionary movement led by Swami Dayanand was called Arya Samaj.

It revived Brahmanism and gave rise to Hindu Mahasabha which has

probably given birth to R.S.S. Dr. Ehsanullah Khan describes that “The

British rulers and their supporters had painted the darkest languages and

cultures of India in the darkest colors. Still, many of the educated Indians

coming out of the new colleges became ardent lovers of their own

languages and cultures and devoted their lives to serve them. The

arrogance and superior airs of the British only roused in the enslaved

Indian people a new pride and an awareness of their own cultural

inheritance. Many European and Indian scholars delved deep into the

past and produced original works as well as translations of Sanskrit

classics to show that the Indian culture was not inferior to that of any

other country. Thus, contrary to the expectations of the British

imperialists, patriotic sentiments and progressive ideas began to stir in

Indian minds and, in course of time, they influenced the literature,

philosophy and political thought of India.” (Khan, Ehsanullah. The

Evolution of the Religious and Social Life of Man. New Delhi: Bait-At-

Hikmat Trust, 1989. p. 43)

Jawaharlal Nehru believes that the impact of “Western culture on India

was the impact of a dynamic society, of a ‘modern consciousness’, on a

static society wedded to medieval habits of thought which, however

84

sophisticated and advanced in its own way, could not progress due to its

inherent limitations. And yet, curiously enough, the agents of this historic

process were not only wholly unconscious of their mission in India but,

as a class, actually represented no such process… they encouraged and

consolidated the position of the socially reactionary groups in India, and

opposed all those who worked for political and social change.” (Nehru,

Jawaharlal. The Discovery of India. New Delhi: Jawaharlal Nehru

Memorial Fund & Oxford University Press, 1948 p. 291)

But the extension and consolidation of the British influence over Indian

ethos took place simultaneously. So many movements and activities of

the British era are the proof of this. Carl Clemen cites the example of

Brahma Samaj founded by Raja Ram Mohan Ray. He notes that the

“extension and consolidation of the British sovereignty in India at the

beginning of the nineteenth century meant the introduction of Christian

and European influence. An important movement began in Calcutta about

that time. Its leader was Ram Mohan Ray (1772-1833). At school he had

been brought into contact with Islam, but after entering the British

Government service and coming into touch with the missionaries he was

led to study Christianity…He then conceived the idea of founding purely

a spiritual religion, which should combine what was best in Hinduism

with Christian faith and manner of life. To this end he founded a religious

community called Brahma Samaj.” (Clemen, Carl. Religions of the

World. New Delhi: Cosmo Publications, 2005. p. 133)

In the words of Michael Molloy, the challenges lying ahead India in the

cultural sense are manifold since “European values have gradually posed

a major challenge to traditional Hinduism…The most significant

85

European influence on India, however, was English…Although India

became independent of Britain in 1947, British influence is evident in

modern India’s law, education, architecture, rail transportation, and

military life.” (Molloy, Michael. Experiencing the World’s Religions:

Tradition, Challenge, and Change. California: Mayfield Publishing

Company, 1999. p.90)

But to find a synthesis between Hinduism and Christianity has never

been an easy task for an Indian. This is more intriguing purely for two

aspects, which must be distinguished between two factors contained in

Christianity: the religion taught in the Gospels, and the system of social

ethics with the customs and practices prevailing in Christian countries. It

was a tough task to synthesize between Christianity as a religion and as

away of life. In the words of Carl Clemen “The first stage is an

overwhelming sense of the majesty of the Gospel; then comes the

recovery of the faculties, in which the value of the inherited religion is

felt again, this sense of its value, however, being modified by the

conviction that it needs to be purified or reinterpreted. The influence of

Christianity as a religion thus operates indirectly; where as the influence

of the Christian social ethics is direct.” (Clemen, Carl. Religions of the

World. New Delhi: Cosmo Publications, 2005. p. 135)

In the words of Mark Juergensmeyer, “The Moguls and their British

successors formed alliance with local kings and left traditional Hinduism

largely untouched. Hinduism remained unscathed in its cultural contacts

in part because of its “tolerance”- a stance that is, in fact, an ability to

absorb an opposition and ultimately to dominate it.” (Juergensmeyer,

86

Mark. Religious Nationalism Confronts the Secular State. Delhi: Oxford

University Press, 1993. p. 82)

India deliberately chose to be secular state because the founding fathers

of this great independent nation accepted the multi-religious nature of its

pluralistic society. The independent India did not want to form a

government designed to defend the faith of only the Hindu majority.

Modern Indian secular state demands creation of a community which

includes the total population of the Union of India, irrespective of their

religious differences.

The Indian way of life applies in all the walks of life and a typical Indian

fragrance is, therefore, present in everything India produces. There may

be seen the impacts and influences from outside world on Indian

endeavor, but ultimately what ever an Indian produces becomes

essentially India. The rule is more visible in Indian English literature.

Motilal Jotwani observes that “In spite of the modern forms and the

common denominator of scientific and technological development all

over the world, Indian literature will remain Indian, since it is the quality

of mind and attitude towards the problems of life and death that

distinguishes one literature from the other. The writer’s whole way of life

is involved at the basis of his or her particular choice of images and

symbols, ideas and associations.” (Jotwani, Motilal. Of Grass and Roots:

an Indianist’s Writings. New Delhi: Sampark Prakashan, p. 2)

In Indian spiritual tradition, especially in Hinduism, there is a lot of

emphasis on the role of ‘guru’-a teacher in one’s life. Because Hinduism

is not organized in a hierarchical fashion, devotion to a guru (Spiritual

87

teacher) is a large and ancient component of Hindu spirituality. The

etymology of the word guru is expressive: “that one who removes

darkness.” Anyone who seeks spiritual growth may turn to guru.

It has been an important Indian ethos to give equal position to women in

the society. The role of women has expanded in modern India. In India’

distant, pre-Aryan past, it is possible that women played an important

role in important public role, but the coming of Aryan culture was

thoroughly patriarchal. Nowadays, however, the situation has changed.

Women are now almost equal to men. This development, however, is

also a fairly urban phenomenon, as most Indian women outside the cities

remain in their traditional roles as wives and mothers.

India and Indian traditions are distinctive among world religions for its

kindness to animals. A devout Hindu does not kill or eat animals. As

Michael Molloy describes, “Cows often wander along Indian streets, and

cars and taxis take care to drive around them. Furthermore, visitors to

some Hindu temples may find monkeys and even mice well fed and

running free. Several extremely popular gods, such as Ganesha and

Hanuman, have animal features; the gods like Shiva and Vishnu are

regularly portrayed in the company of the animal companions.” (Molloy,

Michael. Experiencing the World’s Religions: Tradition, Challenge, and

Change. California: Mayfield Publishing Company, 1999. p.85)

It would be interesting to look at a Psycho-Analytic Study of an Indian in

general and of Hindu in particular given by P. Spratt in his book Hindu

Culture and Personality. The basics of his study are in psycho-analysis.

He clarifies that “According to psycho-analytic theory, the child in its

88

early years assimilates current ideals and examples of adults, and these

form the ego ideal. Actual behavior short fall of the ideal, but the ego is

spurred by the super-ego…the conscience is thus a charge of

aggressiveness directed against the ego and forcing it to try to live up to

its ideal. The emotion which it engenders is that of guilt.” (Spratt, P.

Hindu Culture and Personality. Bombay: Manaktalas, 1966. p.6)

Then Spratt applies this theory on a Hindu psyche by saying that “love

for the self gives Hindu conscience more idealistic character. The Hindu

ego-ideal is undoubtedly more idealistic than the European…The Hindu

strives to ace rightly or to improve himself, not so much out of guilt

feeling as out of love for himself and, derivatively, for the ideal. The

resulting wide gap between ideal and reality- it is wide every where, but

wider than normal in India-it is well recognized.” (Spratt, P. Hindu

Culture and Personality. Bombay: Manaktalas, 1966. p.7)

Regarding the Hindu guilt conscience, Spratt observes that “The Hindu

psyche is not free from guilt. But its guilt feeling is less intense than that

of a punitive…the guilt of the Hindu arises from fear of the operation of

an impersonal law of Karma, implanted not in early infancy but in later

childhood through verbal teaching, and in consequence less deeply felt.”

(Spratt, P. Hindu Culture and Personality. Bombay: Manaktalas, 1966.

p.8)

According to Spratt, this love for ego-ideal among the Hindus gives birth

to narcissistic psyche. Thus the “source of the energy of self-discipline is

the love of the ego, and thence of the ego-ideal. This is the aspiration

which animates the yogi-a concentration of all the psychic energy upon

89

the development of the ego; and the yogi is the model towards which the

Hindu psyche is attracted.” (Spratt, P. Hindu Culture and Personality.

Bombay: Manaktalas, 1966. p.9)

But the coming times are not going to be as simple as they are now. India

will also suffer or gain, as the time will say it, due to the new world order

that is on the verge of execution. The new world order makes cross-

cultural contact practically unavoidable as television, radio, film, travel,

books, and the Internet all work to narrow the gulfs that once separated

people, nations, and even religions. Michael Molloy believes that “there

is a good amount of religious interchange…we find some appropriation

in some religious symbols: the Christian cross is now an international

fashion item…it will be very difficult for any culture, nation or religion

in the future to belong to a single culture or to be unaware of the

teachings and practices of the others.”(Molloy, Michael. Experiencing

the World’s Religions: Tradition, Challenge, and Change. California:

Mayfield Publishing Company, 1999. p.459)

India is not a ‘nation’ in the Western sense of the term. India has

flourished and flowered in the past centuries out of numerous influences,

starting from the coming of the Aryans and their ways of life. But the

common thread of, what is commonly and rightly known and accepted

as, Hinduism has been running through Indian ethos like blood in the

veins through out ages and across the sections of societies. The

influences of the classics like the Vedas, the Upanishads, the Bhagvad

Gita, and the Mahabharata can never be removed from Indian psyche.

The teachings of these classics have inseparably mingled in the lives of

the people who are born in this great nation. The Islam and the British

90

have undoubtedly shaped and re-shaped Indian ethos beyond

imagination, and yet India, through the strength of its roots, has been able

to maintain its identity in the world. The Buddhist and Jainist movements

have only worked in expanding the essential Indian spirits.